[求助]GWD-3-32

robertchu

Agree with C.
C is a critical assumption directly related to the author's line of reasoning..
A , if it is an implicit assumption at all, is not directly related to the line of reasoning, thus not critical.

sendme

A is better, with the same basis which inmates without courses are unlike to stop committing.

C is converse.

jennifer8

C of course, 不过它的表述有点让人费解，加个时间状语与already呼应就清楚了：

The group of inmates who chose to take college-level courses were not already less likely than other inmates to commit crimes IN CASE OF being released BEFORE TAKING THE COURSES.

mikeleven

题目：念了书的囚犯出狱后比不念书的出狱后减少再犯>>>所以不让囚犯念书是错的，违反了政府的目标(降低犯罪)。

A>>不让囚犯念书是不会使他们减少再犯。
那么让囚犯念书后呢?不知道>>所以念书后的囚犯出狱后是否减少再犯?不知道！
A取非>>"不让囚犯念书会使它们减少再犯"，虽然是符合"减少犯罪率"的终极目标，却无法weaken "因为念书使囚犯减少再犯">>便不能weaken "因为念书让囚减少再犯，所以不让囚犯念书的政策错误"。

而正确选项取非，要能weaken黄色的才算数。

C>>想念书的囚犯本来(还没念之前)没有比其他人不易再犯。
即本来跟其他人有(一样的或更高的--not less)再犯率，但事实上，比较出狱后的再犯率，念了书的明显较没念的低>>因为念书导致囚犯变乖，所以不让他们念书的政策错误。
C取非>>"想念书的囚犯本来就不易再犯" weaken "念了书使囚犯减少再犯"，也weaken "因为念书会让囚减少再犯，所以不让囚犯念书的政策错误"

因此C为正确选项，没有C，原题推论就无法成立了。

[此贴子已经被作者于2004-11-27 20:10:48编辑过]

pinkrouge

Part of this effort has been to deny inmates the access they formerly had to（How come here is denying) college-level courses.  However, this action is clearly counter to the governor’s ultimate goal（what is the goal?）, since after being released form prison, inmates who had taken such courses committed far fewer crimes overall than other inmates.

没有人觉得原文说得很别扭么？ 我都不知道它到底想要说些什么，只是习惯性思维让我从答案里选了C，anyone can explain this for me??? My heart twisted because of it.

msfox

同意15楼。

mikeleven

以下是引用pinkrouge在2004-11-30 11:58:00的发言：

Part of this effort has been to deny inmates the access they formerly had to（How come here is denying) college-level courses.  However, this action is clearly counter to the governor’s ultimate goal（what is the goal?）, since after being released form prison, inmates who had taken such courses committed far fewer crimes overall than other inmates.

没有人觉得原文说得很别扭么？ 我都不知道它到底想要说些什么，只是习惯性思维让我从答案里选了C，anyone can explain this for me??? My heart twisted because of it.

to deny (inmates)->O.1 for "deny"
(the access)->O.2  for "deny"
(they formerly had)->modify "the access"
(to)->prep. for "access"
(college-level courses)->O. for the prep."to"

which is: to deny inmates the access (that they formerly had) to college-level courses

(the governor's ultimate goal)->check out the first sentence of the argument "in an attempt to (REDUCE THE CRIME RATE)..."

flymind

以下是引用cranberry在2004-6-14 1:24:00的发言：

i will choose c

C的意思是那些参加大学课程的囚犯原本并非是比别的囚犯更不容易再次犯罪的.换言之，在其它条件相同的情况下，学了课程的囚犯如果不容易犯罪，那么学课程就是有用处的。如果这个不成立，那么就是说，本来这些人就是“向善”的，很简单，学不学这个大学课程并不会影响其犯罪。那么结论“与其初衷相反”就不成立了。

I stick to A.    C  mentioned after being released, not talked about before commiting the crimes.

In addition, A  exclude the benifits of not taking college course , that support the argument -  However, this action is clearly counter to the governor’s ultimate goal

tuzq

以下是引用mikeleven在2004-11-10 18:33:00的发言：

题目：念了书的囚犯出狱后比不念书的出狱后减少再犯>>>所以不让囚犯念书是错的，违反了政府的目标(降低犯罪)。

A>>不让囚犯念书是不会使他们减少再犯。
那么让囚犯念书后呢?不知道>>所以念书后的囚犯出狱后是否减少再犯?不知道！
A取非>>"不让囚犯念书会使它们减少再犯"，虽然是符合"减少犯罪率"的终极目标，却无法weaken "因为念书使囚犯减少再犯">>便不能weaken "因为念书让囚减少再犯，所以不让囚犯念书的政策错误"。

如果不让囚犯读书也能让囚犯减少犯罪，那政策也符合终极目标呀。

而正确选项取非，要能weaken黄色的才算数。

C>>想念书的囚犯本来(还没念之前)没有比其他人不易再犯。
即本来跟其他人有(一样的或更高的--not less)再犯率，但事实上，比较出狱后的再犯率，念了书的明显较没念的低>>因为念书导致囚犯变乖，所以不让他们念书的政策错误。
C取非>>"想念书的囚犯本来就不易再犯" weaken "念了书使囚犯减少再犯"，也weaken "因为念书会让囚减少再犯，所以不让囚犯念书的政策错误"

因此C为正确选项，没有C，原题推论就无法成立了。

我觉得题目有问题，AC都对。

yvonne09122001

以下是引用cranberry在2004-6-14 2:30:00的发言：

A的意思是，没能接受这个大学课程的教育不可能阻止任何人犯本来要犯的罪的。它的逆否命题是要阻止任何人犯原本要犯的罪是一定要在监狱里接受大学教育。

請問何謂逆否命題? 他的作用是什麼呢?